ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2020
Inequalities in Longitudinal Health Trajectories in Middle to Later Life: a Comparison of European Countries and Korea.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Socioeconomic, health, and social connectedness factors associated with self-rated health of octogenarians and nonagenarians in South Korea: urban and rural comparison.BMC public health · 2024Article
- An evolution of socioeconomic inequalities in self-rated health in Korea: Evidence from Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) 1998-2018.SSM - population health · 2024Article
- Global Health Strategies in the Face of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Unprecedented Threats.Journal of Korean medical science · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared inequalities in the longitudinal trajectory of health measured by latent growth curves (LGCs) in Korea and six other developed European countries.
methodsUnconditional and conditional LGCs were fitted, with standardized self-rated health (SRH) as the outcome variable. Two nationally-representative longitudinal datasets were used: the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (2007-2015; 2,761 Swedish, 2,546 Danish, 2,580 German, 2,860 French, 2,372 Spanish, and 2,924 Italian respondents) and the Korean Longitudinal Study of Aging (2006-2014; 8,465 Korean respondents).
resultsThe unconditional patterns of SRH trajectory were similar and unfavorable for women across the countries. Social factors such as education and income generally exerted a significant impact on health trends among older adults. Korea showed less favorable results for the disadvantaged than the advantaged as compared with Denmark, Germany, and France, which was consistent with theoretical expectations. In contrast, the relative SRH trajectory of the disadvantaged as against the advantaged was better as compared with Sweden and worse as compared with Spain/Italy, which was inconsistent with theories that would predict Korea's results were worse than Sweden and similar to Spain/Italy. Women had good SRH trajectory in Denmark and poorer SRH trajectory in Spain, Italy, and Korea, which were consistent. However, women in Sweden showed poorer and mixed outcome, which does not correspond to theoretical predictions.
conclusionThese findings suggest that it is inconclusive whether Sweden and Denmark (with the most generous welfare arrangements) have better trajectories of health, and Spain, Italy, and Korea (with the least advanced state policies) have worse SRH paths among older adults. However, it can be inferred that Korean governmental policies may have produced a relatively worse context for the less-educated than the six European countries, as well as poorer settings for women than Denmark in terms of their initial SRH status.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.